Update Punch Item Type

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Description adds context beyond annotations: partial update ('only the supplied fields are changed') and return value ('returns the modified object'). Annotations already indicate non-readonly and non-destructive, but description clarifies operation specifics.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences plus required parameters and API info. Front-loaded with purpose. Contains some extraneous info (Procore API path), but overall efficient and clear.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple update tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, partial update behavior, required parameters, and return value. Lacks error conditions or prerequisites, but sufficient for typical use.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. Description lists required parameters but does not add significant meaning beyond what the schema already provides. The partial update implication is present but not elaborated.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Clearly states verb 'Update' and resource 'the specified Punch Item Type'. Distinguishes from siblings like 'create_punch_item_type' and 'update_punch_item' by specifying the resource type.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Describes when to use (updating existing Punch List records) and mentions partial update behavior, but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use or alternatives. Adequate but not superior.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.